A girl I work with lives in Blanchardstown, she drives daily to Summerhill in her car. Why t f?
What’s wrong with a modest hatch back?
She’s unmarried and no kids. What the f does she need it for?
Yes obviously, my family's safety is my number one priority when I make choices.
I actually meant to say xc60 because it's an SUV, but anyway, the V60 scores a star above the mini, basically safer, so my point is people might deem something like an SUV a necessity in terms of their safety.
Weight is an important factor, that was my point.
Feck pedestrians then? My safety is first in my car is that it? I refuse to believe thats the right attitude to have regarding safety of a vehicle. It cannot be so.
I'm not talking about pedestrians. If someone wants to buy a car that provides the best safety for the occupants, then that's also a decision in why people might consider SUVs
I’d say much the same. The Mini is much the same frontal size as a V60. The V60 is longer as it’s an estate. Not sure what point you’re trying to make?
The volvo
In a collision with a pedestrian which vehicle gives the pedestrian the highest chance of survival/not getting seriously injured?
Because the earlier poster stated that children were not getting rammed by SUVs.
The child was killed by an SUV. That's a statement of fact, not an allocation of blame.
Why introduce it then?
You said the child was killed by an SUV. Seems clear to me.
Did you miss my question? I asked where I apportioned blame to the vehicle or the driver?
When you said:
The point of the post is to answer the suggestion that children are not getting killed by SUVs with an example of how a child was fairly recently killed by an SUV.
Emphasis mine.
In a collision, what's safer regarding the occupants, a mini or a volvo v60?
Perhaps you could clarify where I apportioned blame to the vehicle or the driver?
But your article, as I recall, didn't say anything about the circumstances of the collision. So apportioning blame to the vehicle or the driver was inappropriate.
BTW all I do is post facts and maybe some conclusions based on the evidence. Your response, it seems, is to pimp dead children to score cheap points.
Cool Jeep!
No one suggested that SUVs are the only vehicles that can cause harm or death to small children.
There's a difference in need between a bin lorry and a Ranelagh tractor.
Yes, I found a fatal collision involving a child and an SUV, and mentioned it in response to a statement that 'SUVs aren't ramming children'. I know you're as keen to sweep child deaths on the run under the carpet as you are to sweep all deaths on the road under the carpet, but that's not really a great idea.
A pedestrian can kill a cyclist, but either way, vehicle size matters.
And proof that the size of vehicle makes little difference when a cyclist can kill a pedestrian.
All full size US pick ups not available in Ireland. Try again.
But cars are faster than SUVs and work vans? Speed kills, no?
Think it would be more correct to say, you found a fatal collision involving an SUV. There was little in the article about cause IIRC, including the relevance of the vehicle type.
But you got to use a dead child as a prop/cudgel, which I suppose was the main thing.
No however the heavier and bigger the vehicle the bigger the risk. We should mitigate/remove risk where possible no?
If someone owned a work vehicle(assuming you mean trade van) without actually needing one you would ask why they have one considering there is no back window to see out of, no?
No one is saying ban them, however if you don't have an actual valid reason for owning one then use something practical like a toyota auris/mini etc.
SUVs are not the only vehicles that can cause death or harm to small children.
My own nephew and godson was crushed to death by a bin lorry at the age of 4. He wasn't the first and he won't be the last.
Does that mean bin lorries should be banned too? Work vehicles? Vans? Lorries? All higher than children. So by that logic they should all go too, right?
Disgusting to bring an emotive article like this into the thread to score points.
If it had been a micra
Are Nissan Micra's much use as a farm vehicle? Do they market them as a farm vehicle?
If not, then that doesn't make any sense.
as a giant tank like SUV
More of the desperate hyperbole. There are a number of articles telling us the make and model; it categorically wasn't a "giant tank". but hey, why let facts get in the way of some obfuscation.
What if it was a "Panzer tank" ?…..
Your patience is incredible. Are you the type who engages with the boring old drunk in the corner of the bar who everyone avoids? There, as here, it’s a waste of time. The brains are addled and they can’t hear you even if they wanted to.
His point is that the height of these vehicles make harder to see smaller at risk pedestrians (Kids) the closer they are to the vehicle.
If it had been a micra they might have actually seen the child as a giant tank like SUV doesn't tower a few extra feet over small at risk pedestrians.
This is partucularly accurate at parking outside Supermarkets where people will be walking in close proximity to the vehicle.
The point about the time taken for information to come out refers to more recent cases, where the type of vehicle involved is not in the public domain as yet.
What's the point of this post, other than to try and tug on heartstrings? What are you actually saying here, because it looks like nothing more than an appeal to emotion?…………………."oh, look, this poor boy was killed by an SUV therefore they're evil and anyone who says anything else is okay with toddlers being mown down, cos, I mean, nobody is okay with dead babies, right…RIGHT!!!!?!!"
Intellectual dishonesty seems to be the order of the day.
Are you claiming he'd still be alive if this wasn't an SUV? How did you come to that conclusion, if so and, if not, what are you actually saying?
Also, what other details are you expecting to come out, given it was three years ago now? And what has it got to do with the post you quoted?
I'm not reading all that blather, there no sense to be had from it..
How do you know that without reading it? My guess is you did read it and can't counter any of it, so you're pretending not to care, while deep down you're actually seething.
Will just say that if someone can't see that a large heavy vehicle is overkill for the majority of people
That's not what you originally said, though. You said "Here we go, an example of one of those unnecessarily large vehicles been driven by someone who doesn’t give too forks about anyone else… typical!" and posted a pic of a big car. You never mentioned anything about the majority of people, you singled out one specific car and said it was too big. You were casting aspersions on someone based on their vehicle. Reverse snobbery, manifest. I asked why, and the rest is history. You're trying to change the goalposts, now, because you've lost the argument. You're pretending that you're talking about the majority of people, when you weren't.
Don't bother quoting me, i prob won't read it.
Sure you will. You just won't be able to argue against it, so you'll pretend not to. Shameless behaviour. Just admit you were wrong about that car originally and we can all move on.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbd35c43580ff62b54e9919958f2a898.svg)
